<p>which ones did you think were harder? they all were very easy if you studied something like barrons</p>
<p>boxplot was 50%, what calculations are doing?
don’t be fooled by the size of the box. That has nothing to do with it. That just tells you the range of the middle 50%</p>
<p>Test was definitely doable, I made dumb mistakes, though.</p>
<p>Sample space is not measured by the difference of the whiskers. The difference of whiskers is the range. The number 70 is the 25% tile, the number 90 is the 75%tile. So 75-25=50. </p>
<p>Say you added the number 300 to the sample. The upper whisker would reach all the way to 300, but that doesn’t mean the number of scores in that upper whisker has dramatically increased.</p>
<p>Perhaps you are right, not sure though I am kind of surprised that I went through all that calculation to get somthing on there list that was wrong, the total number of scores students could possibly get was between the lower and upper whiskers, so thats the total number of possibilities, while the number of scores we want are between 70 and 90 inclusive, taking the ratio gave .75, also the upper and lower quartiles were at 69.5 and 90.5.</p>
<p>Don’t worry. You can get many wrong.
Any ideas on the curve.
44 definite 800
43 likely 800
has anyone seen it dip to 42? it would help if cb gave us our raw scores.</p>
<p>SATnotACT did you leave any blank?</p>
<p>Box plots (box-and-whisker-plots) split data into 4 equal parts… the box representing the middle 50% </p>
<p>The answer is definitely 50%</p>
<p>I left the last one blank.
I know I got at least one wrong.
I was in some time trouble. Not use to that on math tests.
I’m pretty confident I got 800. I lucked out on guessing right a few I was unsure about.</p>
<p>The last one was -2-i or somthing, because I remember multiplying the 10th term by i^(89) and then reducing the exponent modulo 4, so that it was just i</p>
<p>Did you guys get something like .9539 for one of the questions?</p>
<p>I hope there was a really nice curve on this…</p>
<p>Sounds familear not sure, are you thinking about the one that was like pi/2<A<pi, given sin(x)=somthing, find cos(x), you had to be careful because the result should be negative so it was -sqrt(1-somthing^2)</p>
<p>what did you guys think of it?</p>
<p>Well I can’t imagine getting more then 2 wrong, I think perhaps 1 wrong, I managed to have enough time to solve everyone (which is pretty good cause of my ocd), I was shaking alot during it even though the questions were very easy.</p>
<p>I got -.95 for that one.
Yeah, just didn’t have time for the last one.</p>
<p>boby642: Yeah, I felt the same way. I feel like the actual test was a lot easier than the practice tests I was taking</p>
<p>Got that as well, SATnotACT. </p>
<p>swimmerman, were you taking Barron’s practice tests?</p>
<p>Calculator screen went all fuzzy on me during the Math 1 test, figure the batteries had been leaking as I have had it for quite a while, whatever euclidean geometry blehh, there was only like one geometry question on the math 2 at the end, I just used similar triangles then the law of sines.</p>
<p>@swimmerman Yes it was definitely alot easyier, if you had Russen Meylani’s “10 more realistic tests for the SAT subject test math level 2”, It was very similar to the last test. Though in general I wouldn’t recommend his practice tests, they are very unrealistic and just by the way he talks in the intro you can just tell hes a prick imo. Also in an amazon review I saw him bashing one of the commentators who gave him a bad rating. Though I am not sure about his calculator techniques they seemed somewhat clever considering the user only had a ti-84 (I was using a ti-89).</p>